Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Prankster Jailbreaks Apple Store Display iPhone

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the that's-pretty-funny dept.

Iphone 318

Stoobalou writes "A prankster has snuck into his local Apple temple of consumerism and footled with one of the display models." Is it wrong of me to think that it would be awesome if everybody did this to every phone? I mean, it's legal now!

cancel ×

318 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

"it's legal now!" (5, Insightful)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122074)

Even if you do it to a phone you don't own, without permission from the owner?

Re:"it's legal now!" (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122104)

yes, because information wants to be free or something

Re:"it's legal now!" (4, Insightful)

odies (1869886) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122160)

What is even more fun is that Apple users praise this as something that allows them to jailbreak their phone. The "jailbreak" is a PDF exploit that roots your whole phone. I would be a little bit worried if someone could completely take over my phone if I just visited a random website. Apple products don't have exploits or malware, huh? Of course Apple just keeps telling their users they are secure. It's a disaster waiting to happen.

Re:"it's legal now!" (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122294)

What is even more fun is that Apple users praise this as something that allows them to jailbreak their phone. The "jailbreak" is a PDF exploit that roots your whole phone. I would be a little bit worried if someone could completely take over my phone if I just visited a random website. Apple products don't have exploits or malware, huh? Of course Apple just keeps telling their users they are secure. It's a disaster waiting to happen.

Well, you should have bought a blackberry if you were concerned about your data. Instead, fanbois decided to give all their data to big brother Steve.

Note that the United Arab Emirates & Saudi Arabia aren't concerned about iphones, android or nokia.

If you care about the security of your data, there is only one choice.

Re:"it's legal now!" (4, Insightful)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122336)

That's because those phones route their data through the carrier. RIM's phones route it through RIM's internal servers.

Nothing is stopping you from sending out encrypted data on the iPhone/Android/Nokia phones.

Re:"it's legal now!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122508)

Huh, I didn't know I had a direct link from my phone all the way to RIM's servers. Glad to know I don't have to worry about my data going through AT&T's network at all.

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122596)

What I mean is, the data is encrypted on the Blackberry phone then sent to RIM's servers where it's routed to it's destination. Of course the phone has to piggyback off of the Telco, however the data is encrypted and difficult to decipher.

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

Albanach (527650) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122710)

Eh? Your blackberry mail is transferred encrypted between your phone and RIM, so you have little need to worry about what happens on the AT&T network. All you need to worry about is what happens on the sender's computer, every network the email passes through before reaching RIM, and the internal network at RIM.

As the poster said, there's nothing stopping you from using SSL security to encrypt email communications on any other smart phone, providing a similar level of security (or indeed an enhanced level if you'd rather your email is not stored on a 3rd party's servers).

Re:"it's legal now!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122738)

And thats why using Blackberry for emails in UAE is now illegal? Get your facts straight before posting FUD

Re:"it's legal now!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122776)

Yea, that one choice looks great when their internal servers crash and you can't get at your own data. Have fun with that champ.

Re:"it's legal now!" (4, Insightful)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122338)

What is even more fun is that Apple users praise this as something that allows them to jailbreak their phone.

Indeed. On a related note, I'm reminded of two standard arguments:

* "There's no viruses/malware on the Iphone. That only applies to people who have jailbroken their phones. They deserve what they get."

* "What do you mean I can't do [insert basic task] on an Iphone? Of course it can, you just have to jailbreak it." (Apple, it Just Works - you Just have to jailbreak it to get it to Work.)

Re:"it's legal now!" (1, Insightful)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122580)

Actually, as an iPhone owner, I hope, no, expect apple to patch this in the next release. No one (sane) claims apple products don't have exploits or malware... Doesn't stop them being desirable products.

Re:"it's legal now!" (2, Interesting)

theNetImp (190602) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122108)

Yeah that was totally NOT legal. That was destruction of property

Re:"it's legal now!" (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122262)

Destruction? He was improving it!

Re:"it's legal now!" (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122442)

Yeah that was totally NOT legal. That was destruction of property

I doubt it. Display devices are there for customers to experiment with. Otherwise it would be equally illegal to switch channels on a display TV while you are taking a closer look.

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

theNetImp (190602) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122876)

changing the OS is a lot different than tuning to a new station. These devices are not there for "experimentation" they are there for the customer to see if they like the device as it is sold out of the box, not how some jerk decided to modify it so that it's not the same device being sold.

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

Kineticabstract (814395) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122458)

Hardly destruction - reverting the jailbroken iPhone back to its factory default state is trivial.

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

volxdragon (1297215) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122666)

So is sandblasting graffiti off of a wall, it still doesn't make the graffiti legal...

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

Albanach (527650) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122728)

Hardly destruction - reverting the jailbroken iPhone back to its factory default state is trivial.

Perhaps, but they have voided the warranty. Presumably the store staff are no longer allowed to work with that phone.

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

SirMasterboy (872152) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122874)

If the warranty is voided, then why did Apple replace my broken iPhone under warranty which I had previously jailbroken and restored to factory defaults before taking in.

Re:"it's legal now!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122412)

The store put it there for anyone to try it.

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122500)

It's an interesting point - if he can do it simply by visiting a web page, and it's an exploit in the Iphone, is it still illegal? He's only visiting a web page - unless it becomes illegal because you did so knowing it would install software?

Remember, this isn't like taking someone's phone/computer without their knowledge - surely the display devices are put out there for people to play with them, including visiting web pages (otherwise, why did the employees not care; and why was Internet access available?)

Generally, IME it's rare these days for display models of PCs or phones to allow general access at all, most PCs just run locked demos or screensavers, and I'm not sure I've seen working display models of phones at all (though you can probably ask to see it in action). They probably learned from when people played tricks installing programs years ago on display computers, and the problem's only worse with Internet access - nevermind jailbreaking, what's to stop a prankster shoving goatse on all the screens?

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

Score Whore (32328) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122608)

It's an interesting point - if he can do it simply by visiting a web page, and it's an exploit in the Iphone, is it still illegal?

Mens rea.

Re:"it's legal now!" (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122772)

It's not even particularly funny, since the phone isn't obviously different afterward. Now, change a display MacBook to, say, the Dvorak keyboard...

It just done works! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122088)

An iPhone can get rooted by just visiting a web page. Hoo hoo haha haha haha haha. It just done works is what it done!

yes, its wrong (4, Informative)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122096)

Hey, Taco... I think there might be kind of a difference between jailbreaking a phone you've paid for, and jailbreaking the display model at the store which is still Apple's property in a fairly straight forward way. I'm no fancy, big city lawyer, but it seems to me that might have some bearing on just how legal it is to do it.

Re:yes, its wrong (2, Insightful)

ciderbrew (1860166) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122122)

But he only clicked on a link? How was he to know what would happen?

Re:yes, its wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122516)

Honestly, do you think that would hold up? Seriously? Also ignorance of the law does not mean you do not have to follow it. It just means you didnt know you broke it. In this case I seriously doubt he could even claim ignorance as he went straight for the phone and jailbreak.

Re:yes, its wrong (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122588)

Not sure why this was modded troll. He did indeed click a link, and presumably it is not illegal to access web pages on a display model provided for that purpose.

Re:yes, its wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122236)

I'm no fancy, big city lawyer, but...

You are, however, an unfrozen caveman.

Re:yes, its wrong (5, Informative)

a.deity (665042) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122816)

Back in the old days of 2.x jailbreaking (another one where a visit to a website would do it), there would always be a few display models running Cydia every morning. It was just a pain in the ass, and no one at the retail level was greatly angered or even cared too much; we'd just restore them when we saw them. To anyone on their way to an Apple Store to do this: you're not making a subversive statement, you're just taking 5 minutes out of a Specialist's day, one who probably jailbroke their phone a long time ago.

It's not awesome (5, Insightful)

mccalli (323026) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122100)

The cutsie word 'jailbreak' seems to be catching on, but if this were any other os I think the phrase 'gaping remote code execution security hole' might be more appropriate.

I use an iPhone and I thank people who do these exploits for bringing them to attention. If the means of jailbreak is "connect via USB then faff" I can live with it. If it's "go to this website and get an instant remote execution exploit from people you don't know" then I become rather more concerned.

It's an exploit, same as any other. It should be patched as fast as possible and such an action wouldn't be evil, it would be the correct response to a remote execution hole.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:It's not awesome (4, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122258)

Exploit or not, that is still a pretty funny video. I love the fact that the guy spent all that time in the store without a single employee asking if he could help him with something. I guess Apple has an OS security problem *and* a customer service problem.

Re:It's not awesome (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122486)

Exploit or not, that is still a pretty funny video. I love the fact that the guy spent all that time in the store without a single employee asking if he could help him with something. I guess Apple has an OS security problem *and* a customer service problem.

That's not a customer service problem, nothing chases me out of a store faster than overeager salespeople rabid with the thought of commissions. The car dealership I eventually bought from had 0 salespeople chasing after me or the other customers so I could browse in peace, I know where to find them once I need help. Same with an Apple Store.

This is different than, say, one of those big name department stores where you can't find anyone when and if you actually want help or to but something.

Re:It's not awesome (1)

Stewie241 (1035724) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122806)

I'm with you... I don't like to be bothered. Apparently not everybody is like me though. I've been told that the sign of a good salesperson is the ability to read people and figure out whether they just want to be left alone or whether they are waiting for you to come and help them. I don't really mind being asked if I want help, but if I say I'm just looking or if I say I'm okay, then back off and wait until I come and ask.

Also, if I ask a question about something, I *don't* want the salesperson to just pick up the box and read off of it. I am capable of reading myself. I don't mind a salesperson looking at the box for reference and then explaining, but the salesperson should know *something* about what they are selling.

Re:It's not awesome (5, Insightful)

elewton (1743958) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122538)

Maybe it's because I'm Irish, but it annoys the piss out of me when staff bother me without my beckon. It's especially annoying when I'm reading a menu outside a restaurant and they use a greeter. That always moves me right on.

He was obviously occupied, and needed no help. If he wanted to talk to a member of staff, he had only to look up.

Nothing personal, just an off-topic rant.

Re:It's not awesome (1)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122636)

*and* a customer service problem.

That's not a problem – that's good customer service. If I want someone to pester me into buying something, I'll go and ask them, if I simply want to look at it, I expect them to stand around near by, but not so near that I feel pressured.

Re:It's not awesome (1)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122270)

I think the phrase 'gaping remote code execution security hole' might be more appropriate.

Yes, how long until they fix it in a new release?

And, can somebody please assure me that I'll always be able to jailbreak the device?
I'd hate it when I lost my phone and upon buying a new phone I'd discover that jailbreaking was not possible anymore.

Re:It's not awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122284)

Chill out! This is just magic... awesome magic!

Re:It's not awesome (1)

Uranium-238 (1586465) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122326)

No I think it would be evil, what's more stopping people from "Jailbreaking" might be illegal under this hilarious new law. What's more is why even buy one in the first place? (I don't mean only iPhones with this question, I mean smart phones generally)

Re:It's not awesome (1)

GodWasAnAlien (206300) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122438)

With other OS's like Windows, Linux or even OSX proper, you are not in "jail", meaning that you can write and install your own software without permission from the warden. With the iphone and similar devices, you need to find a security flaw in order to escape, and utilize your device more freely.

Re:It's not awesome (1)

Rakshasa Taisab (244699) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122464)

Except those other OS'es aren't running their apps in jails...

FreeBSD goes directly to jail (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122670)

Except those other OS'es aren't running their apps in jails

FreeBSD has a jail [wikipedia.org] , and Gentoo has a similar mechanism built around Linux chroot [gentoo-wiki.com] . But I understand your point: the difference is that the state-law owner of a device is the administrator and has the privilege to manage these jails. On the other hand, TiVo runs Linux, and it enforces restrictions against the owner. More Info... [slashdot.org]

Difference between hole and jailbreak (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122602)

Distinguishing between a "gaping goatse hole" and a "jailbreak" is a judgment call.
  • If there exists no approved method for end users to make and run code, or if running code requires a substantial additional purchase and recurring fee, it's a "jailbreak".
  • If the end user can trigger it by accident, it's a "hole".

The owner of a Windows machine is the administrator. Windows supports configuring a "software restriction policy" requiring validation of Authenticode signatures, but this mechanism explicitly allows the machine's owner to sign software. So any vulnerabilities are holes.

But for iOS devices, the approved method of running code outside the store involves buying a $599 additional hardware device made by the same company (Mac mini) and a $99 per year subscription (iPhone developer certificate), so this is a jailbreak. And in the case of Wii homebrew (which was restored on 4.3 within the past week [hackmii.com] ), it's also a jailbreak because Nintendo is even stricter: becoming an authorized developer involves leasing office space, not coding out of a bedroom [warioworld.com] . And yes, this is affecting developers: see Bob's Game [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Difference between hole and jailbreak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122882)

It might be affecting developers but that Bob guy was fucking crazy.

cute (2, Insightful)

jewishbaconzombies (1861376) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122120)

I laughed - but they restore all computers and iphones (probably iPods too) every day. It'd be a short-lived prank.

But I'm going to laugh more after waiting for years for ATT to provide tethering (which I'd gladly pay for) - if it were wifi - like every-freaking-body-else. Oh no - you can't tether your iPad - because - um - bluetooth only! Yeah that's it! It's apple's fault because they don't support bluetooth tethering - obviously.

What about WIFI? "ahem cough cough - ahem".

Fixed that little problem in 30 seconds - and oh noes - if my phone has problems, I guess I'll just have to suffer and restore it to preserve my warranty. Such a huge sacrifice that.

Suck MyFi dick ATT / Apple - you had your chance for nearly 3 years and you fucked it up. Here's a fork - you know where to stick it to see if you're done.

Re:cute (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122370)

Considering that, from your post, you bought and own an iPhone that's served by ATT, the only MiFI dick sucking being done is from your end.

Here's your fork. You know where it goes.

Re:cute (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122748)

you had your chance for nearly 3 years and you fucked it up.

Considering that, from your post, you bought and own an iPhone that's served by ATT, the only MiFI dick sucking being done is from your end.

Grandparent mentioned "nearly 3 years". This is long enough for a typical mobile phone service contract to end. It's likely that grandparent is in the middle of a switch to Android by now, especially given that unlike the other U.S. GSM carrier, AT&T gives no discount for the lack of a handset payment once your contract ends.

Re:cute (4, Informative)

dirk (87083) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122386)

I'm sure Apple and AT&T are horribly upset that you have given them your money for products you find are inferior.

I just don't understand why everyone keeps buying iPhones and iPads if they don't do what they want. By purchasing them, you are basically telling Apple and AT&T that you are happy with their products and service. If they don't do what you want, don't purchase them and purchase something that does. I don't like how Apple handles the app store, so instead of giving them money and rewarding them for their bad job, I purchased an Android phone.

I have to make compromises (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122782)

If they don't do what you want, don't purchase them and purchase something that does.

Is there a phone that does what I want (get a signal with more than zero bars), does what I want (have physical direction pad and buttons so I can use the phone as a handheld video system), and does what I want (run apps that I approve, not necessarily apps that the phone's manufacturer or the carrier approves)? If there isn't a phone that does everything I want, I have to make compromises.

Re:cute (1)

craznar (710808) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122396)

It isn't just a prank. Installing a remotely accessible back door (SSHD) into the store's internal WiFi store network ... that is seriously illegal stuff.

Ethically wrong, but probably not legally... (2, Interesting)

Shoeler (180797) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122132)

This is certainly ethically wrong. It'd be like me going into your house and installing stuff on your home PC that I want there, without ever asking and without your knowledge.

Nevermind the fact that you should have protected it with a password, at the least.

Of course the password thing doesn't work as well when you're trying to sell iPhones.

It's not like you have an agreement you have to approve or anything to use their iPhone

Re:Ethically wrong, but probably not legally... (2, Informative)

Barny (103770) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122202)

We have display PCs where I work, it takes us about 20min to wipe them and reload our image for display, I would guess apple have a similar thing in place.

We don't give net access to them, but neither do we count them as safe from virus' since anyone off the street can come in and toss a USB stick into them while a sales staff is busy.

Re:Ethically wrong, but probably not legally... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122232)

This is certainly ethically wrong.

But... but... but he's an iPhone user. You know, those cool, fashionable, trendy, enlightened, socially-aware, politically-correct, progressive hipsters who eschew the insecure Windows running IBM-PC clones that the boring, mundane, ordinary, unenlightened, reactionary people use.

It is even possible that such a noble being could do something ethically wrong?

Re:Ethically wrong, but probably not legally... (1)

GodWasAnAlien (206300) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122626)

The comparison is not valid.

Unless your house is open to the public and you allow people free access to your display model PC, as the Apple store allows.

A customer entering the store has signed no contract, and there are no given rules of what a customer should be doing on the display models.

If caught, Apple could at most ask the customer to leave, as this is not illegal activity, and no property is damaged. The customer visited a website allowing the device to be demoed more freely with non-syndicated applications.

Perhaps Taco would love it... (1)

Rational (1990) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122136)

...if I visited his place, and then took it upon myself to install perfectly legitimate copies of Windows on all his computers?

Re:Perhaps Taco would love it... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122234)

Why bother reinstalling? Just make sure he's up to date with his service patches.

Re:Perhaps Taco would love it... (1)

Machtyn (759119) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122832)

That would be a crime against humanity!!
and torture
and, perhaps terrorism

or would installing Linux be the torture part?

:)

Idle is right (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122140)

Beyond the vaguely amusing "Let's stick it to Apple!" shtick that's been going on for a while, what the fuck is the point of this?

Oh no! Some kid did stupid shit and posted it online! Huzzah?

What next? Are we gonna go out and watch as the kids giggle as they smoke pot outside the police department?

Reason for anti-Apple sentiment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122446)

The reason for all the "sticking it to Apple" is simply that Apple is a massively hype-oriented and consumer-unfriendly company led by an unrepentant demagogue. It's basically "not a nice company", despite making nice gadgets.

Nobody bashes Apple for making bad products, nor for designing poor human interfaces. In areas such as these, Apple deserves praise, and its gets a lot of it.

But in other areas such as pricing and especially control-freakism, Apple deserves nothing but contempt, and when people express such contempt, it is well earned by the company.

So don't get upset by it. This is normal community feedback, and it's operating properly and fairly.

You could also... (4, Funny)

Trip6 (1184883) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122152)

...paint the outside of a display phone with honey, and then the next person to pick it up would have honey all over their hands. That would be funny too!

Re:You could also... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122416)

Um... that's not honey.

Re:You could also... (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122590)

Superglue would be funnier. Talk about a death-grip.

technically (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122158)

technically, its still not legal, because somewere in there, you are going to be breaking Apples Licence agreement, trust me, even if you dont believe you are, there lawyers will see fit that it is, and if they cant, theyll just add it to the end, like with the nuclear weapons clause

Re:technically (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122200)

Somewhere amongst all the commas I think this post starts out with something I agree with. I'm just not sure about the end. My mind stack-overflowed when I saw the transition to nuclear weapons.

Re:technically (1)

RJHelms (1554807) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122360)

I believe this is a drug-addled reference to the phrase in section 3 of the Java license agreement: "You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed or intended for use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear facility."

What that has to do with jailbreaking, however...

Re:technically (1)

MikeyO (99577) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122544)

Are you sure this guy agreed to and is bound by a licensing agreement? Do you have to enter into an agreement with apple to use one of their display models?

Re:technically (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122704)

technically, its still not legal, because somewere in there, you are going to be breaking Apples Licence agreement

Which licence contract did the user agree to, in order to use the display model?

I, for one (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122190)

are happy that I can buy a new iPhone directly from Apple almost without any ties to any phonecompany and with all features enabled.

Although they have forgotten to remove the 20 megabyte at&t download limitation from itunes. Can jailbreak solve that? I'd like to download podcasts from 3g and I actually have free (national) calls and unlimited data for tethering or whatever. (the benefit of working for a big company that can make proper deals with the data carriers)

Re:I, for one (1)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122244)

I guess you're not in the US, because jailbreak or not, you need ATT to use 3G. Thank you FCC.

Re:I, for one (2, Informative)

BarryJacobsen (526926) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122708)

are happy that I can buy a new iPhone directly from Apple almost without any ties to any phonecompany and with all features enabled.

Although they have forgotten to remove the 20 megabyte at&t download limitation from itunes. Can jailbreak solve that? I'd like to download podcasts from 3g and I actually have free (national) calls and unlimited data for tethering or whatever. (the benefit of working for a big company that can make proper deals with the data carriers)

There is indeed a jailbreak app that can make apps think they're on wifi - My3G (and there are probably others).

Wrong? (4, Insightful)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122216)

Is it wrong of me to think that it would be awesome if everybody did this to every phone? I mean, it's legal now!

Wrong? Probably. Infantile? Absolutely. Legal? Absolutely not. It's called vandalism which is still illegal.

Did that, done that, been there. (1)

leuk_he (194174) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122374)

Remember those days when they had a C-64 on display in the store? And you wrote a little program

10 Print I am bad.
20 goto 10

Including some peek and pokes to make noises.

Re:Did that, done that, been there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122472)

Did one better. I put ZSNES on a floppy, had Super Mario World running on the demo, ejected the disk and went on my way. I wonder how many confused customers that made :D

Re:Did that, done that, been there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122522)

ZSNES existed for the C-64?!?

Re:Did that, done that, been there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122716)

I remember programming one to display "Please press any key." When that was done, the program would then flash "Security has been notified -- please remain where you are." while playing a siren sound. I then ran the program and turned the volume all the way up on the TV. Before I even got to the front door, I could hear it back in electronics: "weeeeoooooo weeeeeooooo weeeeeoooo...."

Re:Wrong? (1, Funny)

Rah'Dick (976472) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122420)

I get your point, but it's kinda funny that adding functionality is being called "vandalism" here.

Re:Wrong? (4, Insightful)

rotide (1015173) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122554)

Modifying something without the owners consent is vandalism. I can modify your car with a brick or with a new engine. You may dislike both of those options as your old engine got you 40mpg while the new one is so much more awesome (your opinion) at 500hp and 15mpg (yay for car analogies!).

Same thing is happening here. Apple wants things a certain way and it makes no difference what your (or anybodies besides Apple's) opinion is about what is being done to the phone. No matter how much "better" _you_ think it is, it is theirs and they don't want you mucking with it in that way. I'm no Apple fan, far from it, but even I can see this isn't something you want to make a habit out of as the police will eventually make their presence known when Apple catches on.

(I know you're trying to be funny and not entirely serious, but I thought it still needed to be said).

Re:Wrong? (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122760)

Modifying something without the owners consent is vandalism.

By that logic, anyone who uses a display model such as visiting web pages is committing vandalism. Whilst it's unclear where the line might be drawn in when doing something to a display model becomes "vandalism", it's not as simple you describe, nor is using a display model comparable to using someone else's machine without their consent.

as the police will eventually make their presence known when Apple catches on.

Nice to know police resources may be used to patch up Apple's security holes. And why do they allow unrestricted Internet access on display models in the first place, if they really have a problem with people doing things? (In practice, they probably don't care, and just reset the device every day, as others here have suggested.)

Re:Wrong? (1)

Rah'Dick (976472) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122896)

True, it's an unauthorized modification - but the term vandalism [uslegal.com] doesn't really apply here, if one strictly adheres to the legal definition. No "serious physical harm" (loss of value in excess of $500) happened; all of the original functionality is actually still there.

Re:Wrong? (1)

cpscotti (1032676) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122680)

Freaking Funny and Creative? Definetly!

Re:Wrong? (1)

langelgjm (860756) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122812)

Wrong? Probably. Infantile? Absolutely. Legal? Absolutely not. It's called vandalism which is still illegal.

What if someone fingerpaints an image of a phallus and sets that as the iPhone's background?*

Wrong? Probably. Infantile? Absolutely. Vandalism? Maybe, but honestly, it's a display model, there's a reason they have to sell them at discounts, if at all.

*Disclaimer: I don't own an iPhone, maybe it's not possible to change the background. (I'm kidding, I hope)

Re:Wrong? (1)

Radtoo (1646729) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122858)

Why is it just infantile? This is the shape minor political activism takes.

In this case, I am pretty sure a whole demonstration would not have better effect than this prank. Even if it probably won't reach most people, still.

Not so legal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122220)

I mean sure, legal to jailbreak your own iPhone, but doing it to a store phone could easily be classed as vandalism.

Go to the original source, Slashdot (-1, Troll)

Mr. DOS (1276020) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122250)

Re:Go to the original source, Slashdot (4, Insightful)

Idbar (1034346) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122304)

How in hell is now reddig (or digg, or whatever "aggregation service" - even Slashdot - for that matter) an "original source"?

Re:Go to the original source, Slashdot (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122664)

Reddit users post a fair amount of original content to the website, of varying levels of quality. Of course, it can be hard to tell whether or not a particular piece of content is actually original as its submitter may claim. But plenty of people upload movies/images/etc. to wherever for the sole purpose of linking to it from reddit.

Footed? (1)

necro81 (917438) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122264)

A prankster has snuck into his local Apple temple of consumerism and footed with one of the display models.

Is that what the kids are calling it these days?

Re:Footed? (2, Funny)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122316)

I'm pretty sure they meant "fisted".

Re:Footed? (1)

HiChris! (999553) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122652)

A prankster has snuck into his local Apple temple of consumerism and footed with one of the display models.

Is that what the kids are calling it these days?

I thought that was weird to... the original site says footled so they probably meant fooled - though footled is a word, but doesn't mean anything that makes sense. Of course my l33t speak is a bit rusty.

FootLed, not Footed. (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122318)

"A prankster has snuck into his local Apple temple of consumerism and footed with one of the display models."

The word they used was "footled", not "footed". Footled means To waste time; trifle. Footed means to pay for, or to dance.

Actually, I'm not sure either word is good for describing what this person did. It was planned and deliberate, not an act of idleness or foolishness. Neither was it a dance, or the paying of a bill. Words like "sabotage", "cracking", "prank", come to mind.

Re:FootLed, not Footed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122510)

I just thought "footled" was an Apple term for "made love with."

How long before deep freeze comes to the demo ipho (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122372)

How long before deep freeze comes to the demo iphones just like the macs in the store?

Just because you have the right to do something... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122422)

...doesn't mean it's necessarily the right thing to do.

Re:Just because you have the right to do something (1, Redundant)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122788)

The thing is, he didn't have the right to do this because it was not his iPhone. The law gives one the right to jailbreak one's own phone, not phones owned by Apple.

this FP for GNAwA (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122480)

is part of the Slashdot'5 FreeBSD project,

why is this interesting? (1)

craftycoder (1851452) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122518)

Hmmm, can I have those 3 minutes of my life back?

Re:why is this interesting? (1)

jombeewoof (1107009) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122694)

you would just waste them anyway

I'm 100% for jailbreaking, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33122568)

This hole NEEDS to be fixed and Apple needs to be working on it now.

Meh... (1)

Stick32 (975497) | more than 3 years ago | (#33122768)

I've taken to going to apple stores and queuing up the Friend Bar [theonion.com] on all the macs near the genius bar. The average user wouldn't even notice a jailbroken iphone when they come in. I take pleasure in getting an average joe asking about the friend bar to apple employees.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>